Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

You know, it's probably worth noting that we're talking about a spectrum when it comes to the audience's knowledge of Star Trek. At one end, you have people who don't know or care who the captain of the Enterprise is, and at other end, you have the lifelong fans who can quote chapter and verse on every episode. But those aren't the only options--or very representative of the general audience.

In between, you have millions of people who have enjoyed the occasional Trek movie or TV series over the years, and maybe even watched TOS or TNG semi-regularly, but whom, for whatever reasons, had gradually drifted away from the later spin-offs and movies. But whom, yes, still know who Spock is and what "beam me up" means.

Somewhere in the middle of that spectrum is where the vast majority of the audience lies, not out at either extreme. It's not an either/or situation pitting hardcore Trekkies against total newbies.

Rebooting TOS, but without forty years of baggage, was the smart, sensible way to reach that huge middle ground.

I'm sorry but I don't buy this. One of the biggest problems was how everything stayed the same. Why shouldn't they just make a new universe with no convoluted plots to tie it with the already known one? They should've just severed all ties with the old one and explain offscreen or something that it was a mirror universe to appease the fanboys that the old one exists, which keeps the new universe consistent with the old one without trying to make awful plots to connect the two.

Click to expand...

Each to their own. I liked their in-universe reset, and enjoy the easter egg references in the post-Nemesis novels.

Additionally, the characters suffer the same problem. Regarding the lines, one or two popular lines are okay, but it was overkill and told me they're trying, albeit poorly, to try to make these the same characters. Lastly, they depend too much on "destiny" to make this like the old stuff, but they end up making the movie worse. Spock and Kirk are good friends in the old universe. Spock and Kirk start off hating each other in the new one, which seems natural given their irritable personalities. But they have to become friends immediately because Old Spock told them to do so. So then they become faux-friends instead of any building up of true friendship. Why not build up the relationship over several movies? Would stink of less fakeness. Or why does Kirk have to be promoted (commissioned?) to captain? Kirk was the captain in the old series so apparently he has to be captain in this movie. Why not have the next movie years later when Kirk is further along in his career? He became an admiral offscreen in The Motion Picture so why does he have to become captain onscreen in this movie? In the mirror universe episodes not everyone has the same role as the regular universe so why does everyone have to end up the same in this one? Why does Kirk have to be captain and him and Spock friends? Making these things so made the movie lose organic feel and made it too unbelievable because they didn't move enough away from the previous universe and they poorly forced things things through.

Click to expand...

From what I know of Into Darkness...

Kirk makes a mistake and loses his command

He needed to be captain to set that up.

And as for Kirk and Spock...

KIRK: If I were there and he were here, what would [Spock] do?

McCOY: He'd let you die.

They're allies, but not yet the friends they were in Old Spock's timeline.

You know, it's probably worth noting that we're talking about a spectrum when it comes to the audience's knowledge of Star Trek. At one end, you have people who don't know or care who the captain of the Enterprise is, and at other end, you have the lifelong fans who can quote chapter and verse on every episode. But those aren't the only options--or very representative of the general audience.

In between, you have millions of people who have enjoyed the occasional Trek movie or TV series over the years, and maybe even watched TOS or TNG semi-regularly, but whom, for whatever reasons, had gradually drifted away from the later spin-offs and movies. But whom, yes, still know who Spock is and what "beam me up" means.

Somewhere in the middle of that spectrum is where the vast majority of the audience lies, not out at either extreme. It's not an either/or situation pitting hardcore Trekkies against total newbies.

Rebooting TOS, but without forty years of baggage, was the smart, sensible way to reach that huge middle ground.

Click to expand...

It's really the only thing they could have done if they made another movie. Paramount isn't in the business of making a minority of Trek fans happy, they want to make money. Kirk, Spock and McCoy are known on some level to a vast majority of audiences. It could have been done poorly and just a cash grab. But it is a really good and entertaining movie. A lot of thought was put into it and they took the time to put in a ton of references to the original series. Like the sound effects, the tribble and a ton of other details.

A) We were never going to see another TNG movie. The returns just weren't there. Not only that, but there wasn't even the faintest hint of a DS9/VOY/ENT movie, again, because the returns weren't going to be there. TNG was a highly rated TV series, and by their 4th outing, they had fizzled. It happens, but contrary to the wishes of a number of fans, subsequent series movies were not in the cards, and will not happen, not in the usable lifetimes of the actors in said series.

B) I was thrilled to see the original crew taken in a new direction, and I wasn't disappointed. I think STXI was exactly what Star Trek needed. Fresh faces, updated technology, and out from under the burden of a top heavy in-universe canon.

I look forward to STXII. I expect it to be fun, fast paced, and loaded with adventure. I don't think it will disappoint.

A) We were never going to see another TNG movie. The returns just weren't there. Not only that, but there wasn't even the faintest hint of a DS9/VOY/ENT movie, again, because the returns weren't going to be there. TNG was a highly rated TV series, and by their 4th outing, they had fizzled. It happens, but contrary to the wishes of a number of fans, subsequent series movies were not in the cards, and will not happen, not in the usable lifetimes of the actors in said series.

B) I was thrilled to see the original crew taken in a new direction, and I wasn't disappointed. I think STXI was exactly what Star Trek needed. Fresh faces, updated technology, and out from under the burden of a top heavy in-universe canon.

I look forward to STXII. I expect it to be fun, fast paced, and loaded with adventure. I don't think it will disappoint.

How about the new direction of all the characters not standing around chattering superficially but at length about alleged Big Ideas while boring the audience to tears?

That's certainly been an improvement.

Click to expand...

Some of us find sci-fi ideas more interesting than "BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" lens flare shenanigans.

Still, I think it's best to judge JJ-Trek on the following film really. Star Trek 2009 made Star Trek a sell to the public again and that's what it's best to consider it as. It's up to this next film to deliver on ideas and exploration. I really hope there's more meat to the film than the trailers are giving us.

How about the new direction of all the characters not standing around chattering superficially but at length about alleged Big Ideas while boring the audience to tears?

That's certainly been an improvement.

Click to expand...

Some of us find sci-fi ideas more interesting than "FIRE EVERYTHING!" lens flare shenanigans.

Still, I think it's best to judge JJ-Trek on the following film really. Star Trek 2009 made Star Trek a sell to the public again and that's what it's best to consider it as. It's up to this next film to deliver on ideas and exploration.

Click to expand...

Yeah, cause no Trek movie has had a big space battle or was exploration focused. I'm mean look at TMP, uh no that was about saving the Earth, but close... II...Uh III...okay IV, no that was time travel to stop the destruction of Earth...V, there you go that was about exploration--sort of...VI? no...Generations? No....FC? Oh hell no. Insurrection, meh exploration but still cashed in one the ground and space battles...Nemesis, yeah not really mostly the battle but it wasn't Earth focused, except for Nero trying to destroy the Earth.

Yeah, cause no Trek movie has had a big space battle or was exploration focused. I'm mean look at TMP, uh no that was about saving the Earth, but close... II...Uh III...okay IV, no that was time travel to stop the destruction of Earth...V, there you go that was about exploration--sort of...VI? no...Generations? No....FC? Oh hell no. Insurrection, meh exploration but still cashed in one the ground and space battles...Nemesis, yeah not really mostly the battle but it wasn't Earth focused, except for Nero trying to destroy the Earth.

Trek movies have never really been about exploration.

Click to expand...

The difference is though, we'd had season after season of different types of stories and ideas. The creative teams had 'earned' the right to let their hair down when it came to the movies.

Yeah, cause no Trek movie has had a big space battle or was exploration focused. I'm mean look at TMP, uh no that was about saving the Earth, but close... II...Uh III...okay IV, no that was time travel to stop the destruction of Earth...V, there you go that was about exploration--sort of...VI? no...Generations? No....FC? Oh hell no. Insurrection, meh exploration but still cashed in one the ground and space battles...Nemesis, yeah not really mostly the battle but it wasn't Earth focused, except for Nero trying to destroy the Earth.

Trek movies have never really been about exploration.

Click to expand...

The difference is though, we'd had season after season of different types of stories and ideas. The creative teams had 'earned' the right to let their hair down when it came to the movies.

Click to expand...

Still, that's a bit different than saying the movies need to get back to ideas and exploration. And look at DS9, it turned into largely Space Above and Beyond in the final years.

How about the new direction of all the characters not standing around chattering superficially but at length about alleged Big Ideas while boring the audience to tears?

That's certainly been an improvement.

Click to expand...

Some of us find sci-fi ideas more interesting than "FIRE EVERYTHING!" lens flare shenanigans.

Still, I think it's best to judge JJ-Trek on the following film really. Star Trek 2009 made Star Trek a sell to the public again and that's what it's best to consider it as. It's up to this next film to deliver on ideas and exploration.

Click to expand...

Well I found the aspects of time travel, alternate universes with familiar yet different versions of characters and the characters knowing that they are branch of another timeline and that their lives were radically altered by a single event. Yet, they all seem to come together as if despite the different pasts, there is a certain fate for those characters. Kirk is meant to be captain, Pike is meant to be injured and Spock is meant to work with Kirk and eventually become Kirk's friend. You also have Spock dealing with the near extinction of his people as well as the personal trauma of seeing his mother killed in front of him.

Still, that's a bit different than saying the movies need to get back to ideas and exploration.

Click to expand...

Well I'm not necessarily averse to starting things off with a bang. It just came off as hollow due to its lax narrative, and even more so when we are TOLD IN THE MOVIE that we're literally watching some alternate universe characters. May as well have been a feature-length mirror universe episode.

How about the new direction of all the characters not standing around chattering superficially but at length about alleged Big Ideas while boring the audience to tears?

That's certainly been an improvement.

Click to expand...

Some of us find sci-fi ideas more interesting than "FIRE EVERYTHING!" lens flare shenanigans.

Still, I think it's best to judge JJ-Trek on the following film really. Star Trek 2009 made Star Trek a sell to the public again and that's what it's best to consider it as. It's up to this next film to deliver on ideas and exploration.

Click to expand...

Well I found the aspects of time travel, alternate universes with familiar yet different versions of characters and the characters knowing that they are branch of another timeline and that their lives were radically altered by a single event. Yet, they all seem to come together as if despite the different pasts, there is a certain fate for those characters. Kirk is meant to be captain, Pike is meant to be injured and Spock is meant to work with Kirk and eventually become Kirk's friend. You also have Spock dealing with the near extinction of his people as well as the personal trauma of seeing his mother killed in front of him.

I'm fairly sure those were ideas.

Click to expand...

You know how the movie felt, a little--anyone that's into anime will know what I mean, one of those anime movies that condenses down and retells the story of the series but in a 2 or 3 hours movie instead of multiple episodes. It was Do You Remember Love (not as good mind you), the same concept: Condense and retell the series in a movie format.